Re: Electricity again
- From: "Sorcerer" <Headmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 08:17:14 GMT
"tadchem" <thomas.davidson@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1155247875.642027.324520@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
| Sorcerer wrote:
|
| > One gigawatt for 1 microsecond is 1 kw/sec, which is 0.278 kWh.
| > I could run a 100 watt lighting bulb for 2.78 hours on the energy of
| > one lightning bolt. Not very useful.
|
| Do you ever read anything longer than the side panel of a cereal box?
|
| The Wiki article on lightning
Do you ever read anything longer than the side panel of an encyclopedia
ANYONE can write? How is that different to the side panel of a cereal box?
If Wiki is your source of information I'll go in and change it.
(I've posted the link multiple times)
| tells us:
| "An average bolt of negative lightning carries a current of 30-to-50
| kiloamperes(kA), although some bolts can be up to 120kA, and transfers
| a charge of 5 coulombs and 500 megajoules (enough to light a 100 watt
| light bulb for 2 months). " [the section titled "The discharge"]
|
| and in the next secion (on *positive* lightning) it goes on:
| "An average bolt of positive lightning carries a current of up to 300
| kiloamperes (about ten times as much current as a bolt of negative
| lightning), transfers a charge of up to 300 coulombs, has a potential
| difference up to 1 gigavolt (a billion volts), lasts for hundreds of
| milliseconds, and dissipates enough energy to light a 100 watt
| lightbulb for up to 95 years."
And the source for this remarkable "fact" is an experiment carried
out by flying a kite in a storm and a stopwatch to time the
duration of the strike, is it?
I don't care how many times you post the link, I question it.
(And your sanity.)
|
| > |
| > | At 1.06 volts per voltaic cell
| > | http://www.fleetsubmarine.com/battery.html
| > | you would need about *5 Billion* cells wired *in series* to capture a
5
| > | gigavolt lightning bolt.
| >
| > Connect them in parallel, then. I regularly recharge my beard trimmer
| > from a nominal 3V source, it's a "so-what" if it works and it has for 3
| > years.
|
| Then you look around for a 3V lightning bolt.
|
| Voltages add in series, but not in parallel.
Oh, do behave, we all know that.
I can charge a 12V car battery with 14 volts and it will read 13.6V
at the end. Run the starter motor and watch the volt drop, batteries
have internal resistance. Learn that voltages are nominal.
We are discussing storage of energy, and BY YOUR DATA,
One gigawatt for 1 microsecond is 1 kw/sec, which is 0.278 kWh.
I could run a 100 watt lighting bulb for 2.78 hours on the energy of
one lightning bolt. Not very useful.
Do you ever read anything longer than the side panel of a cereal box?
| You can't put 5 billion
| volts into a 3 volt battery.
Why not?
| Transformers only work with smoothly
| varying AC, not with DC or pulsed current.
They certainly do work with pulsed current.
http://www.mselectrical.co.uk/index.php?category=87
|
| Honestly, you seem to be completely ignorant of even the most basic
| facts of electrical technology.
Honestly, you know zilch about electronic/electrical technology, anyone
using Wiki as a source of primary information has to raving mad.
|
| > I'm not suggesting you charge batteries directly. I was comparing power,
| > read what I said.
| > On your guesstimates, 5 gigavolt * 300,000 amps for "fraction" of a
| > second (I've chosen 1 microsecond)
|
| Your preference for straw men is well known, both here and in the
| Village. Lightning lasts *hundreds* of microseconds, as mentioned in
| the Wiki article you have been ignoring.
Yes, I ignore your Wiki strawman. Any moron can change it, add to it,
put in anything they like.
|
| > is 5kV * 300,000 amps for one
| > second, or 1.5 MW per second,
|
| If power is energy per unit second then power per unit second is what,
| exactly?
joules = watts * seconds.
I'm not interested in your strawman. If you've changed my 1 microsecond
to 100 microseconds then multiply by 100, I don't care, it still amounts
to very little.
| The *power* of lightning bolts is on the order of *gigawatts*, not
| megawatts.
I used gigawatts. Are you questioning 1.5 MW for 100 seconds now?
|
| You cannot replace a 1000 hp dragster with 1000 one-horsepower horses
| and still get the same kind of performance. It doesn't work that way.
Your preference for straw men is well known, both here and in the
Village.
|
| > about that of a wind turbine generator.
| > I mention that because the air pressure pulse of a lightning crack is
| > essentially a short burst of wind that becomes thunder as it echoes
| > and lasts longer.
|
| Try an *explosion* of air heated to a 36,000 K plasma in a hundred
| microseconds:
| http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunder
| "In the 20th century a consensus evolved that thunder must begin with a
| shockwave in the air due to the sudden thermal expansion of the plasma
| in the lightning channel."
|
| The shock wave expands at Mach 1.0, a little too fast for a 'wind.'
So does the shockwave from cracking a whip.
Your preference for Aunt Sallies is well known, both here and in the
City.
| > There is insufficient energy in a lightning bolt to be useful in a
practical
| > sense, but we have the technology to capture it should we so choose.
|
| The energy (hundreds of megajoules)
joule = watt * second, so the energy is
1 megawatt * 100 microseconds.
Your preference for scarecrows is well known, both here and in the
Town.
is more than adequate to be
| considered useful.
No it isn't. 95 100w lightbulbs for one year will only light one street
for a year, it won't provide energy for every house as well. Isn't the main
breaker in your home at least 100 amps? 110V * 100 amp = 11 kW.
How many homes in Richmond?
Pop - 197790, 2.4 to a family, call it 80,000 homes, 1,000,000 kW.
That's a gigawatt needed, continually, not for just 100 microseconds.
How about New York, pop 8,000,000?
| Several gigavolts and hundreds of kiloamps at the
| same time make it hard to capture.
I already said that, snipping moron.
| We should feel fortunate that we
| have access to suitable conductors for that much current. Many
| pre-Franklin structures have been ruined by lightning strikes.
Oh, do behave. 300,000 amps will melt ANY lightning conductor
if it goes on long enough. Ever heard of HRC fuses? I'll bet
you've never replaced a hot 300 amp fuse, let alone 300,000 amp.
Lightning rods do not melt, the current doesn't last long enough.
Honestly, your knowledge of basic electrics is pathetic, go back
to chemistry where you belong. Wiki indeed. Do the numbers.
Androcles
.
- References:
- Re: Electricity again
- From: Teja
- Re: Electricity again
- From: tadchem
- Re: Electricity again
- From: Sorcerer
- Re: Electricity again
- From: tadchem
- Re: Electricity again
- From: Sorcerer
- Re: Electricity again
- From: Sorcerer
- Re: Electricity again
- From: tadchem
- Re: Electricity again
- Prev by Date: "Weighing the world" - interesting video
- Next by Date: Re: "Evidence of the Existence of the Aether"
- Previous by thread: Re: Electricity again
- Next by thread: Re: Electricity again
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
